However, this information wasn’t previously available – the government had previously not acknowledged this information. Also, there are discrepancies in what the government had told us about our they have been using our CPF. In this two-part article, we highlight what these discrepancies are, and discuss the areas where the government needs to be transparent to Singaporeans on how they use our CPF.

(1) Does the GIC Know that They Invest Our CPF or Not?

Now that we know that our CPF is invested in the GIC, let’s take a look at what the GIC says about this. Do you know that as late as last month, the GIC had previously said that, “GIC manages the Government’s reserves, but as to how the funds from CPF monies flow into reserves which could then be managed by either MAS, GIC or Temasek, this is not made explicit to us.”

Thus up until last month, the GIC had stated that they do not know if they manage our CPF because this is not “made explicit” to them.

However, this month, the GIC changed this information on their website. Below is what they have replaced the information with:

GIC, along with MAS, manages the proceeds from the Special Singapore Government Securities (SSGS) that are issued and guaranteed by the government which CPF board has invested in with the CPF monies. So while the CPF monies are not directly transferred to GIC for management, one of the sources of funds that goes into the Government’s assets managed by GIC is the proceeds from SSGS.

Thus coupled with the what the government had finally acknowledged this month (in Chart 1), the GIC has now also finally acknowledged that they do use our CPF for their investment. Then the question is, why is it that up until May this year, the government had refused to acknowledge that our CPF is invested in the GIC but they then suddenly did an about turn a few weeks ago? Also, why has the GIC previously refused to admit that they are using our CPF to invest and only finally admitted a few weeks ago that they do? Why did the GIC suddenly change its stance?

Demand for Transparency: Why did the government and the GIC previously refuse to admit that they use our CPF to invest in the GIC but suddenly did an about turn and finally admitted this month that they do use our CPF to invest in the GIC?

(2) Should the Singapore Prime Minister and Ministers Also Be on the Board of Directors of the GIC When There is A Conflict of Interest?

But this admission is further compounded when you realise the next piece of information. Do you know who is on the Board of Directors of the GIC? The Chairman of the GIC is actually the Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong and the other members are the two deputy prime ministers Tharman Shanmugaratnam and Teo Chee Hean, the Minister for Education Heng Swee Keat and the Minister for Trade & Industry Lim Hng Kiang. Lee Kuan Yew is also the Senior Advisor.

With this as a backdrop, the above information thus becomes even more interesting.

First, if the government, and the Singapore prime minister no less, is on the Board of Directors of the GIC, then can the GIC not know that they are using our CPF to invest?

And if the GIC would know that they are using our CPF to invest, then why did they tell us previously that they do not know?

If the government knows that they are using our CPF to invest in the GIC, why did the government not admit to this information previously?

Why did the government/GIC only admit to this information a few weeks ago that they are using our CPF to invest in the GIC?

Also, do you know that the GIC claims that, “The Government, which is represented by the Ministry of Finance in its dealings with GIC, neither directs nor interferes in the company’s investment decisions. It holds the board accountable for the overall portfolio performance.”

In fact, this is also reiterated by the government, which says that, “The Government plays no role in decisions on individual investments that are made by GIC, MAS and Temasek. At the GIC and MAS, whose boards include Ministers, these investment decisions are entirely the responsibility of their respective management teams.”

Again, can it be possible that the government does not direct or interfere in the GIC when the government, again the Singapore prime minister no less, is on the Board of Directors of the GIC? According to Phillip Ang, “GIC’s performance is not as stellar as made out to be by the government. In fact, it appears to be punting with CPF monies and has been simplistic and even reckless! … In 2007, total CPF members’ balance was $137 billion. A prudent fund manager would not have sunk 10% of total funds into a single investment. GIC was totally reckless. The board of directors should have been held accountable.” Phillip Ang also discussed GIC’s investment failures in his article and said that, “CPF members are now paying the price for GIC’s failure.”

Thus:

If the government is also the GIC, then is the government’s priorities taking care of Singaporeans’ CPF, or earning via the GIC?

Also, if the government is also the GIC and when the GIC makes investment failures with Singaporeans’ CPF, who will hold the GIC accountable? Can the government hold the GIC accountable when the government is the GIC, and especially when the Singapore prime minister is the GIC Chairman? Can the Singapore Prime Minister hold himself accountable?

If the government is the GIC, then isn’t there a conflict of interest?

Perhaps the most important question of all is this – other than earning millions in salaries as the government from Singaporeans’ taxpayers’ money, how much are the ministers who are also on the GIC’s Board of Directors also earning in salaries from Singaporeans’ CPF? Have Singaporeans ever been told how much of our CPF is used to pay them?

Demand for Transparency: Why did the government make themselves the Board of Directors on the GIC? Are the ministers on the Board of Directors qualified fund managers? When losses are made by the GIC, who holds the GIC accountable and puts in measures to prevent future investment failures? How much are the ministers on the Board of Directors paid? Since there is a clear conflict of interest and this arrangement between the government and GIC has existed for decades, has this conflict of interest shown a lack of responsibility on the government, as well as the GIC’s part, to manage Singaporeans’ CPF responsibly?

(3) How Long Was the Temasek Holdings Using Our CPF to Invest and When Did the Temasek Holdings Stop Using Our CPF to Invest?

Last week, Temasek Holdings also wrote to The Straits Times to say that, “Temasek does not invest or manage the savings of CPF members.”

However, the book, Development States: Relevancy, Redundancy Or Reconfiguration, it was written that “since the late 1970s, CPF’s reserves as part of public sector surplus have been co-mingled with other investments either domestically by Temasek Holding Ltd or abroad by the GIC”.

This means that Singaporeans’ CPF was at one time invested in the Temasek Holdings.

If so:

How long was the Temasek Holdings using Singaporeans’ CPF to invest?

When did the Temasek Holdings stop using our CPF to invest?

Temasek Holdings only revealed the information that they do not use our CPF to invest a few weeks ago (early June). Does this mean that as late as May, the Temasek Holdings was still using our CPF to invest?

The Government systematically reviews the overall risks of its whole portfolio of assets invested by the three entities… Based on the overall risk profile of the Government’s portfolio, it decides how government capital should be allocated among the three entities. This takes into account the different investment orientations of MAS, GIC and Temasek, which place them at different parts of the spectrum of investment risk.

Thus when did the government decide to remove our CPF from being invested in the higher-earning Temasek Holdings to the lower-earning GIC? Also, how was this decision taken? Has any reports been revealed?

Demand for Transparency: When did the government stop using Singaporeans’ CPF to invest in the Temasek Holdings? For how long did the government use our CPF to invest in the Temasek Holdings? Why did the government decide to stop using our CPF to invest in the Temasek Holdings? How was this decision made? Why did the government and Temasek Holdings not tell Singaporeans that at one point, our CPF was used to invest in the Temasek Holdings? Why is this information omitted?

(4) How Much Did the Temasek Holdings Pay For the Pioneer Generation Package?

The Temasek Holdings also said the following:

Temasek pays taxes on its profits and also distributes annual dividends to its shareholders. These dividends supplement the taxes collected by the Government to fund various programmes, including lifelong medical support for the pioneer generation.

As of March last year, Temasek Holdings has a portfolio value of $215 billion. $400 million is only 0.002% of the total portfolio value. Of this $400 million, how much did the Temasek Holdings contribute to? Say if the Temasek Holdings contribute only a quarter of the Pioneer Generation Package or $100 million, this would be only 0.0005% of their total portfolio. Even when seen as a percentage to the Temasek Holdings’ net profit of $11 billion, this would only be 0.009%.

So, how much exactly did the Temasek Holdings contribute to the Pioneer Generation Package. But more importantly, how much did the Temasek Holdings earn from Singaporeans’ CPF and what is this amount that is not returned? Is the contribution to the Pioneer Generation Package piecemeal then, in comparison to the earnings from Singaporeans’ CPF which are not returned?

Demand for Transparency: If so, how much exactly did the Temasek Holdings provide for the Pioneer Generation Package and for what purpose?

(5) Where Does the Additional “Injection of Capital” to the GIC and Temasek Holdings Come From?

Finally, the government says that, “the Government has not and does not transfer funds to Temasek or GIC to improve their performance figures”.

However, the government says that what it does is to “inject capital into Temasek from time-to-time as part of the Government’s allocation of fresh flows of funds”.

According to the government, these “Capital injections can increase the size of the portfolio but do not improve the investment returns”.

For this last part, I leave you to discern for yourself if there is a difference between the “transferring of funds” and the “injection of capital”. Also, is there a difference between “hiding investment losses” and “increasing the size of the portfolio”?

To the layman, these terms are only big words which hide the true picture. The only way we can truly know is if full reports are revealed by the GIC and Temasek Holdings on how they use are CPF to invest, what losses had occurred, how these losses were managed, how funds were moved around and where these funds come from.

In fact, the government might claim that they “inject capital” into the Temasek Holdings. However, where does this “capital” come from? The reserves are already managed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore, GIC and Temasek Holdings. If the reserves are already fully managed by them, then where does the additional “capital” come from?

Moreover, the government says that they do not “transfer funds” so the additional “capital” should not have come from existing funds. If so, where does the additional “capital” and these “fresh flow of funds” come from? What is the breakdown of sources for this additional “capital”

Does this additional “capital” come from raising additional CPF from Singaporeans? Also, how does this additional “capital” change year on year?

Demand for Transparency: What are the losses that GIC and Temasek Holdings have made since their inception? What have they done to manage the losses? How much “capital” has the government injected into the GIC and Temasek Holdings since their inception? Where does this additional “capital” come from? The government has to reveal the full reports of the GIC and Temasek Holdings since their inception for Singaporeans to analyse for ourselves how our CPF is being used by the government, GIC and Temasek Holdings.

Finally, do you also notice the following?

The government only admitted that they use Singaporeans’ CPF to invest in the GIC in early June this year (a few weeks ago).

The GIC only changed the information on their FAQ to admit that they use Singaporeans’ CPF to invest in early June this year.

The Temasek Holdings only revealed that they do not use Singaporeans’ CPF to invest in early June this year.

Everything happened in early June this year. Last month, I was still employed. Why early June? Did the government do anything prior to June to review their “overall portfolio of assets” and re-allocate them? Did the GIC do anything prior to June before admitting to knowing that they use our CPF to invest? Did the Temasek Holdings do anything prior to June to stop using our CPF funds to invest? Why did all these happen suddenly, together? What happened back-end? I leave you to think about it.

In the second part of this article, I will discuss further on the discrepancies and how it is time that the government is transparent to Singaporeans on how they are using our CPF to invest.

It is clear that something is amiss in the management of our CPF by the government, the GIC and Temasek Holdings. There are still loopholes and discrepancies which the government has not addressed. This are important loopholes that the government has to acknowledge and speak up on, especially so since this concerns the retirement funds of Singaporeans.

What exactly is going on with Singaporeans’ CPF!

On 12 July 2014, an event will be held to discuss the CPF issues and the lack of transparency and accountability from the government and for Singaporeans to demand to the government to #ReturnOurCPF.

Wake up Singaporeans, you have been fooled. Today I have noticed that the GIC has re-arranged the chart of management to fool the Singaporeans, Do not fall into their tricks. Ask them why GIC has been created as a private company. Ask them why the GIC’s financial accounts hasn’t been published online. And ask them why the GIC’s accounts hasn’t been audited by an external auditors. They are auditing their own actions; it is a serious breach of public trust.

Wake up Singaporeans, you have been fooled. Today I have noticed that the GIC has re-arranged the chart of management to fool the Singaporeans, Do not fall into their tricks. Ask them why GIC has been created as a private company. Ask them why the GIC’s financial accounts hasn’t been published online. And ask them why the GIC’s accounts hasn’t been audited by an external auditors. They are auditing their own actions; it is a serious breach of public trust.

You are right Antany, Temasek has been made a Private Exempt Company to evade auditing checks. Also PA has failed auditing multiple times. Yet, when AHPETC got a disclaimer of opinion, they created a big hooha. I am not sure why such a big company like Temasek can skip audit. Who is the minister who endorsed this? Our tax money and CPF at stake. Why are they allowed to play such mickey mouse game? The 60% idiots better wake up before it is too late.

Wikipedia: Temasek is one of a few global firms assigned with the highest overall corporate credit ratings of “AAA” by Standard & Poor’s and “Aaa” by Moody’s. It has also attained perfect quarterly scores on the Linaburg-Maduell Transparency Index, a measure of the openness of government-owned investment funds.

Also, Temasek is audited by the Auditor General. You have to believe the “conspiracy” is not just PAP but a very wide swathe of the civil service, and that nobody has figured it out before Roy came along!

With his half-baked analysis, poor logic skills, and a large dose of misplaced conviction this man will get to the bottom of the “conspiracy” eventually. Stay tuned for another episode of the comedy called Roy coming to a blog near you very soon!

Even people’s President Ong Teng Cheong failed to audit our reserves when he was alive. Something is terribly wrong with this country. Where are the checks and balances???? How can an uncle of the PM become president and how can his wife manage our reserve???? The 60% idiots better wake up before it is too late.

i am not suggesting any wrongdoing, but if the internal checks of any organisation are not robust enough, then any wrongdoings might not be discovered.

as we can from examples like Teh Cheang Wan and Peter Lim Sin Pang, no organisation is infallible, while we see high level civil servants being hauled up for wrongdoings every now and then, i am curious why I have never seen a case(pls correct me for my ignorance if i am wrong) where an SWF employee is dismissed or charged for wrongdoing, is it a case where all the employees are saints, the internal checks are not robust enough to get them, or some other unknown reason?

Mr Ong Teng Cheong was told they needed 56man years to come up with the information he wanted. If some ppl can treat and speak to a president in this way, i shudder to think what would be going on in the minds of these ppl if they were speaking to lesser mortals like us.

Roy is a professional paparazzi, apart from digging information and stirring issues, no constructive input so far. Have u left your job to be engaged as paparazzi? Information you displayed nothing surprising to me, in fact the questions you put across surprise me. This clearly demonstrates the level of inmaturity and incapability of yours.

YOU! talking about paparazzi what’s your name?? anyway it does not matter, nobody cares.
if you write next time, please use correct English. If your are more mature you will realise that Roy has been sacrificing his time to dig out information which had been hidden from the public of Singaporeans and which is the right of the public to have. Do you have any solution, broken English kid?? If the government is the all powerful and refuses to own up, how will you find solutions? so, the first step is to dig our the whole truth. Therefore Roy is doing a fantastically good job.
KC.

Good questions. Lets hope government provides more clarity if it does not compromise national security.
Just a note there is clear difference between injection of capital vs unspecified transfering of fund. The capital likely come from the budget surplus from tax, sale of land etc. Fundamentally not wrong to inject capital.

You have no case. No welfare or pension system in the world can satisfy your silly expectations. All welfare or pension funds are invested in relatively safe holdings with fund managers who also manage many other risky but far more lucrative investments. So, does that entitle the welfare or pension systems to demand the better returns while not taking any risk?

Capital injection is not surplus. Capital injections don’t play up returns too. Your facts are all wrong.

You better think how to settle out of court than get into bigger trouble. Go brush up your financial knowledge first instead of making all kinds of mistakes commenting on things you hardly know. You seem not to know much what you’re talking about.

@Roy has no case
PAP needs lots of people like you to stay in power perpetually.
I like to manage you and your like minded friend’s money. Keep with me for 50 years and don’t ask question ok. I can be richer than Bill Gate.

Sure…if you can guarantee the interest rates year after year. Are you ready to lose your CPF money?

In 2008, I lost almost 60% of my investments but managed to recoup most of it back, are you ready to take that kind of loss with your CPF?
The GIC must be willing to take those kinds of risk for that kind of earnings.

@roy
R u stupid or pure dumb? After 2 yrs of “research” u have found nothing that the rest of us dun know.
I wonder how u sustain ur life now that u r jobless. Do u continue to leech on ur parents? Do u continue to leech on ur donors? Or worse r u paid to create trouble here?
Transparency? From what I can see, u dun have any transparency dealing with ur donors money. Who is auditing these donations? Who is making sure u only spend ur donations on ur court case and nothing else? If u think that showing ur passbook printout and some other statements of accounts is enough, u r so mistaken. Yes, these ppl can continue being stupid and donate to u.
U r such an opportunistic pig…

@Chris
You are concern about Roy’s donation which is a hundred thousand dollars and donated willing by people but you ignore the call for transparency for billions of our CPF money.

That alone makes you bias and illogical and you call yourself a neutral. Hahaha. When you have a stroke, you don’t go to a hospital and complain about a headache instead of getting treatment for the stroke. Do you?

@ace
I’m only concern if my cpf is safe. And it is. Is it my concern how govt use the money?
Various govts in all first world countries will provide such schemes in different forms. Did their ppl ask such stupid questions like Roy? Did they ask why they need to put money into such schemes?
Who does Roy think he is? What sort of transplant is he talking abt? To what extent? Until he and his idiot friend can see each individual’s cpf? Why should he see how much I have in my cpf? Even if I have zero cpf is none of his concern.
Period!!!

@Chris
Now I am really worried about you.
1. You are not concern how the govt use the CPF money?
2. Can you tell me which country and which scheme requires people to contribute but do not show how the money is invested?
3. Transparency is always a key when handling public/pension funds. You can read the article below.http://www.pensions-institute.org/commentaries/comm_blake_feb01a.pdf
4. Which article did Roy state that he want CPF individual statement to be able to be seen by others? You accuse Roy of not being honest but you are actually putting words in his mouth and accusing him of things which he did not say or even remotely suggest.

BTW, Roy does not want to represent you or anyone else who is happy with the current non-transparency of the CPF.
That is your prerogative and I respect that.
However, there are many others who prefers to know exactly what our CPF is being use for. Can you also respect this?

I am not the one who suggested that. A particular blogger suggested that people can get arrested by the ISD at 3am. (3am must be an auspicious timing for a certain blogger since he keeps having something at this timing. i.e. stomach pain or potential arrest by the ISD)
Oh here is the Facebook url for your reference.

No one can understand the real problems till you are 55 yr old and above. And you need your CPF for some very personal reasons and /or to consult doctor every 3-4 mths for medications. Then you WILL KNOW. How accessible is your CPF, MEDISAVE, CPF RETIREMENT FUND & ETC.,

@uncle lim,
Were u ever denied medications in sg? If they ever deny u, u tell the press. I assure u. Whoever denied u will lose his or her job.
u r free to use ur money in whatever way u like, so I presume u have savings or income. Is that not enough?
If u can’t even manage ur savings and income properly, what make u think u can manage ur cpf money?
even if u have ur cpf in full lump sum. How long do u think that’ll last u? Why not just let govt disperse ur cpf money monthly when u retire? And that’s a perfect excuse for u not to lend ppl money…
So, what’s the hell is Roy advocating? Again, it’s all just rubbish.

@uncle lim,
My dad does. And he’s much older than 55. So I know.
I never ask my dad for money even for my flat and wedding. And I told my dad not to borrow money to anyone, including me. Dun touch ur cpf, if need be just rent ur HDB and stay with me… Then u can keep ur rental, but he dun want.
So, do u think I dun know?
If ur children dun want to take care of u, there r legal channels for u to seek help.
For most ppl, the reason they live well even if their income is low becos they r frugal. If u r frugal and continue to work, u will have enough and u can get help if u r truly poor.
Pls dun think I am rich. I am just prudent. My parents taught me well.
Lastly, If u have any personal vices to feed, then no one can help u.

How come I’ve known for at least 15 years that GIC primarily invests CPF money while Temasek primarily invests government surpluses? This hasn’t been a state secret.

Then again, it probably has something to do with the fact I work in the financial industry and have a better than kindergarten understanding of finance. Roy has made so many errors in his post above that I don’t know where to start. Let’s just give one tiny example:

Roy wrote: “As of March last year, Temasek Holdings has a portfolio value of $215 billion. $400 million is only 0.002% of the total portfolio value.”

$400 million is actually 0.2% of $215 billion – Roy is off by a factor of 100 but let’s not let facts get in the way of Roy’s beliefs.

@roy
I work in manufacturing. Normal grad, take public transport everyday and stays in HDB.
I know that since my university days abt Gic, th and a bit of cpf… As I get older, I understand more in depth. All this knowledge was gathered without need to “research for 2 yrs” using my company’s time.
Further more, I like my cpf. I do not need u to poke ur greedy nose into my cpf. Dun ever say that u speak for all Singaporeans. Greedy asshole Roy. When u accept donations from old ppl, I despised u. No backbone piece of shit…

I kind of find it exceptionally odd that they have finally admited GIC is handling CPF funds while still insisting Temasek isn’t. So is it they know they can’t lie any more in court to prepare for the case that they are now making a U-turn or is it because they know that they can no longer lie to the people any more ?

But making such an abrupt U-turn at the last minutes honestly doesn’t seem to augur very well about the integrity of our PM either, isn’t it ? Especially on the part that the Govt does not interfere with GIC decisions when the board is headed by the PM himself together with a few other ministers. Roy has raised a very good question that If Temasek capital does not come from CPF funds, then where does Temasek capital comes from ?

Are they using a lie to cover another lie ? It looks as if they have messed up big time on the CPF issues that instead of providing the right answers that are required, they are in fact causing more questions to be raised arising from their half-baked answers.

@ Alan
“If Temasek capital does not come from CPF funds, then where does Temasek capital comes from ?”

The simple answer is it comes from Government budget surpluses. The Ministry of Finance decides how much to invest through Temasek.

Temasek is actually very transparent and there is plenty of information available online about what it invests in, etc. From Wikipedia: Temasek is one of a few global firms assigned with the highest overall corporate credit ratings of “AAA” by Standard & Poor’s and “Aaa” by Moody’s. It has also attained perfect quarterly scores on the Linaburg-Maduell Transparency Index, a measure of the openness of government-owned investment funds.

Roy is looking for a conspiracy but unfortunately he either doesn’t understand what he reads or chooses not to understand. He is spreading misinformation and I encourage you to do your own research.

@alan
In what way is Roy raising good questions?
Gic and th and others r all audited internally and externally. So does Roy want to be part of the audit committee?
Then he’ll need to go bk to school to study and then get relevant work experience. Looking at his questions, he dun make any sense. Why should anyone want to have a dialogue with him? Does it make sense to talk to a person who makes baseless accusation? Why would anyone want to give such a person any credibility?

@roy
What r u trying to do here? Every one of my comments directed at u r not replied. Then u will post a new post. Then ppl need to do this all over again.
U like open dialogue so much? Why r u not being open?
Ur research and postings smells of only one thing. To make baseless accusations on the integrity of Singapore system. Then u opportunistically fan the public against the system.
The lucky thing is most of us r not stupid to believe u. But it’s imperative to stop ppl like u.

@Chris
The next dialogue by Roy at HLP is on 12 July. You can dialogue and debate with him.
Don’t worry, it will be recorded and we can know once and for all whether Chris or Roy is better.
Are you available?

Hi auntie ng,
From the comments it seem a lot but this is social media. Lots of fake id and emails…
That’s why we cannot take ppl like Roy seriously. The best websites to read the truth is still the official website like cpf, mas, mom, etc. If in doubt, send them email to clarify.
Even online polls cannot be taken too seriously unless there’s safeguards.
Alas, u may be right. There is a chance that a lot of foolish Singaporeans… So need to right the wrong that Roy is giving…
For all the advanced education, we cannot control human greed for more. Roy is just playing a game here. Despicable…

Roy will never reply to comments that contradict his opinions. He behave exactly like PAP, replying and amending things that will favour his arguments while those comments that contradict him will either be ignored, reply with a standard “the truth will prevail” answer or claim the person is an PAP IB.

@roy
If u r so vigilante, why dun u do us a favour? Track down all the asshole children who leave their parents in nursing homes, without paying the money or visit them.
That’s more meaningful. If u can make them pay the charges.

@Chris
Since you work in manufacturing,a Normal grad that take public transport everyday and stays in HDB.
Then you describe yourself as just a nobody who knows nothing about the financial world and what is really going on in Singapore

So, the degrees offered here are largely accepted in other English-speaking countries.
This is something they surprisingly said they regretted.
Studying abroad is a great experience and with some careful preparation,
perhaps using some or all of the steps above,
you will ensure your study abroad experience is positive and that you get
the move out of the experience.